This is the thing that always gets me. We hear reports that our troops on the lines don't have enough quality equipment be it food, weapons and armor, vehicles, etc, so we must buy more but then we sell "surplus" to the cops. Is this truly surplus or is this just a middleman deal? The military buys the gear that is wanted to militarize the domestic ground forces and passes it on? Granted, I used to think such conspiracies were not worth the time but the more and more I see and read about our entire government and the games they play, there are days I start to wonder. Then again it may be as simple as "If we don't spend the department budget, they will cut the budget and we can always just sell it off to the cops."

That would be assuming he took it on his own volition. Do you have proof of this? More importantly, did the cops have proof of this upon pickup or did they just assume he did without considering that he may have been a victim of someone slipping it to him? I mean if we follow your logic the root cause of this is that his parents let him out in the world, or had a son, or had sex, or met, ...

However root cause or not, this is police brutality and they should be held to a higher standard - no matter how hard their job may be.

Actually, this makes me wonder if there was a third scenario. He was one of their "puppet terrorists" they were grooming for "attaboy" media disclosure and "look we are doing something" kangaroo court and it got away from them.

I whitelisted Techdirt when you adjusted the layout a while back. This is something other sites could take note of. Decent size (not huge popups that overshadow what I came for,) related or on-topic (most of the ads I see are all tech related including WGU with their awesome IT programs. Go Night Owls!) and, as mentioned by previous posters, aren't loud or jarring. There are few other sites that are that considerate so thank you for respecting your readers.

He steered a person into the TSA private screening booth and no one questioned him in the first place? How did he get around to it? Of course the TSA is going to take over the investigation. The shirt color and slacks things works at Best Buy; it should not work at a security checkpoint, even if it is only designed to deter lowest common denominator problems.

Interesting wording though for the Chief:Our department will not arrest civilians if they audio-record any on-duty police officers in a public place
So does this mean that they will arrest you if you film them in a private business? or your home? While this is probably over analyzing, this guy does seem to give words a twist when he speaks. (Reference his previous statement: "He honestly thought he was OK to do it, so now if he continues to do it, I can’t tell you that he certainly won’t be arrested.”

Buy stock of light bulb company via the subsidiary of their shell company. Promote said Company's light bulbs as brighter thus allowing for better security from terrorists and child molesters. Also fight for local light bulb installer union and how the LED consortium is trying to take away good American jobs,
Then after all the lobbying, fighting, delaying tactics, and closed door trade agreements are done: we pay 16.63 million for a guy with a top secret security clearance to come in and screw in a light bulb.

I didn't see anything about them having to pay back and money made while the ads run. In reality, if rumblefish did this with a bunch of vids that weren't really theirs and only half of the owners stopped them by arguing RF would still make quite a bit of change wouldn't they? Maybe that was their plan? (I get that they won't make a ton on ads but I could see where it would all add up if they did this a lot.

When I read this, I wondered if this was actually part of an undisclosed agreement between Apple and Giz to make the whole iPhone prototype thing go away. I know the DA dropped charges a while ago but just made me wonder if this was the plan all along.

Mom: OK please sign this indemnification clause for me (since I gave you permission) and this other statement that states I am your sole beneficiary in the case of your accidental death and that your father has no claim on any funds you or I receive.

I love this line. So "someone" would need to come up with a test or evaluation method that would check political understanding as part of the Census (per the article.) Does this mean the incumbents would vote on defining "political understanding" prior to the Census so that they ensure the right set of voters?

It does because of the choice of people.
If I choose to make this information publicly available then the government has free access to it no warrant involved.
If I choose NOT to post these types of things, then the government doesn't get free reign to it without a proper warrant.
If I choose to share this information say on Facebook but lock it ONLY to friends then the government should not be allowed to snoop my facebook account without a warrant. Granted, if my friends share the info with them, then I will have a few less friends but no beef with the government (which is funny because the government also thinks that this is completely fair EXCEPT when wikileaks does it of course.)